Gully v Cregoe
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 12 March 1857 |
| Date | 12 March 1857 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 53 E.R. 327
ROLLS COURT
See Curnick v. Tucker, 1874, L. R. 17 Eq. 323.
[186] gully v. cregoe. Feb. 16, 17, March 12, 1857. [See Oitmick v. Tucker, 1874, L. E. 17 Eq. 323.] The testator gave his residuary real and personal estate to his widow, " to and for her own sole use and benefit for ever, feeling assured and having every confidence that she will hereafter dispose of the same fairly, justly and equitably amongst my two daughters and their children," and he appointed her sold executrix and residuary legatee. Held, that the widow took beneficially for life, with remainder to the two daughters and their children, as she should appoint; but the Court refrained from declaring how the property would devolve in default of appointment. The testator expressed himself as follows:-" I also give, devise and bequeath unto my dear wife, Maria Josephine Gully, all my property of every nature, sort, kind and description whatsoever, and wheresoever situate, whether real, freehold 328 PEARL V. DBACON 34 BEAV. 1M. copyhold, leasehold, or chattel, money and securities for money, as, to and for her own sole use and benefit for ever, feeling assured and having every confidence that she will hereafter dispose of the tame fairly, justly and equitably amongst my two daiighters and their children. And I hereby nominate, constitute and appoint my said dear wife the sole executrix and residuary legatee of this my last will and testament." The testator died in 1853, leaving his wife and his two daughters; one daughter had five children and the other three children. The question was, whether this was a valid precatory trust, and what interests the several parties took. Mr. Amphlett...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Arthur Pageitt Greene and Godfrey Greene, Infants, v John Greene and Others
...2 Drew. 221. Barnes v. Grant 26 L. J. N. S. Ch. 92; S. C. 2 Jur. N. S. 1127. Shovelton v. ShoveltonENR 32 Beav. 143. Gully v. CregoeENR 24 Beav. 185. Bonsar v. KinnearENR 2 Giff. 195. Wace v. Mallard 21 L. J. N. S. Ch. 355. Webb v. WoolsENR 2 Sim. N. S. 267. Raikes v. WardENR 1 Hare, 445. C......
-
Reid v Atkinson
...v. KnightENR 3 Beav. 148. Sale v. MooreENR 1 Sim. 534. White v. BriggsENR 15 Sim. 17. Groffotjs v. EvanENR 5 Beav. 241. Gully v. CregoeENR 24 Beav. 185. Green v. Marsden 1 Drewr. 646. Stubbs v. Sargon 3 Myl. & Cr. 507. Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of Gloucester v. WoodENRENR 3 Hare, 131; ......
-
Hart v Tribe
...as we contend is, that the widow has a power of dealing both with capital and income. [Thorp v. Owen (2 Hare, 607) and Gully v. Gregoe (24 Beav. 185) were referred to.] [420] Mr. Martindale and Mr. F. T. White, for the Respondents, were not called upon. the lord justice knight bruce. Wisely......
-
M'Auley v Clarendon
...1 Russ. 509. Randall v. RussellENR 3 Mer. 190. Knight v. KnightENR 3 Beav. 138. Horwood v. WestENR 1 Sim. & St. 387. Gully v. CregoeENR 24 Beav. 185. Webb v. WoolsENR 2 Sim., N. S., 267. Jones v. SmithENR 1 Hare, 43. Whitbread v. Jordan 1 Y. & Col., Ex., 303. Jones v. WilliamsENR 24 Beav. 4......